Wait! according to the 'holy' Bible, the righteous Lut slept wit his two daughters and impregnated them... But Noah? Let me check that...

There's a lot of incest in the Bible, one might mix up the stories... but I do know that Abraham and Sarah (according to the holy Bible) were not only husband and wife but also brother and sister.... Ooooh I'm feeling the holiness of Yahweh filling my heart... Reading the Bible can be very uplifting you know... try it CM, you won't regret it.

By the way, Abraham (who married his half-sister), Jacob (who married two sisters), and Judah (who wanted his son to impregnate his dead brother's wife) were apparently living under different Yahweh rules. Because Yahweh in Leviticus 18:6-18 explicitly forbids all of this.

Last edited by debunker on Fri May 08, 2009 6:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

And really upset that his son-in-laws covered him when he was sleeping naked.

Which is an even more confusing moral.

..... Well, actually, since the story's another one of those Genesis "Why we hate the people on the other side of the valley" deals, it actually makes PLENTY of sense. It's a flimsy reason for the Israelites to hate the Canaanites and subjugate them. (Gen. 9:20-27)

debunker wrote:Wait! according to the 'holy' Bible, the righteous Lut slept wit his two daughters and impregnated them... But Noah? Let me check that...

There's a lot of incest in the Bible, one might mix up the stories... but I do know that Abraham and Sarah (according to the holy Bible) were not only husband and wife but also brother and sister.... Ooooh I'm feeling the holiness of Yahweh filling my heart... Reading the Bible can be very uplifting you know... try it CM, you won't regret it.

By the way, Abraham (who married his half-sister), Jacob (who married two sisters), and Judah (who wanted his son to impregnate his dead brother's wife) were apparently living under different Yahweh rules. Because Yahweh in Leviticus 18:6-18 explicitly forbids all of this.

Debunker, you are speaking of the history of Abraham, Lut, Jacob, Judah, all are myths/folk tales of pre-Judaism, pre-Christian, pre-Islam times, but in pagan times, i.e. the time of the pagan Pharaohs of Egypt. That is the way those primitive people lived. Study the lives of the Pharaohs and it will tell you that such customs were common in that era. It has nothing to do with the faiths of Moses, or Jesus, or Mohammad. People get their time scales screwed up.

elle, it is pointless to argue. We see here exactly what the thread topic alleges. Christianity is an easy target.

Your real problem, debunker, is that you cannot provide one single iota of evidence that the things you allege ever actually happened.

Archaeology does not show any evidence whatsoever that Moses or anyone else carried out any large scale warfare in the area. In fact, there is no evidence whatsoever that Moses ever even existed - or, if he did, that the entire saga was on such a small scale that the story just grew upon the telling until it became unrecognisable.

The Israelites did not even become Monotheistic until much later than any Moses tales.

The latest Archaeology tells a very different tale regarding the so-called slaughter of Canaanites, and says that the Israelites originated in Canaan, turning from semi-nomadic Canaanite tribes people into developing a distinct culture and turning to agriculture.

It furthermore shows that the Kingdom of David was no where near as vast as Biblical stories would have us believe and that David's Jerusalem was actually little more than a village.

When the Southern and Northern Hebrews were forced to unite, due to attacks upon the North, they combined also their traditions in order to provide a common identity. In other words, they combined their folk stories.

The aggressive campaigns of the slaughtering Muslim armies however, are well documented - both by Muslim chroniclers and by non-Muslim. Not only that, but they took place thousands of years AFTER any alleged Bible stories, so it seems the Muslims, from the earliest days of Islam, were incapable of advancing their own thinking or modernising themselves but were rather happy to drag the Arabs backwards in time instead.

Your tu quoque arguments against the Bible - trying to make some moral points off of 3500 year old human stories in order to try to make Islam seem somehow superior - are pathetic at best.

If you still want to slander Moses, et.al., then feel free. But provide credible evidence that these Bible stories ever actually happened first.

please note Brenda that the whole "tu quoque" thing started when one of the posters here, whined about why the Quran isn't mocked unlike the Bible. My response was, instead of mocking either why not make movies based on stories from these two books... I was trying to make the point that the Bible is FAR from being exposed.... too many stories are unknown to the vast majority of Christians... then we got into the "comparison" game... and by the way, I don't believe the lies in the Bible slandering Moses, other prophets and God.

Anyway, whether Moses existed or not, Yahweh exists or not, why not produce a movies about stories from both te Bible and the Quran? I don't see why do you object to the production of such movies?

BTW, according to a German professor, Mohammed also never existed...

Finally, it really irritates me when atheists think they have all the answers... what makes you think that archeology has given you the whole answer and the true size of the Kingdom of David?

Much of the text in the Bible, Torah and Koran have mostly been written many years after the event, some hundreds of years, and depends much on the memory or embellishments of the narrator and the interpreter or scribe. To go to war and kill one another on the basis of such myths? is ridiculous. It is essential that modern man must interprete some of this folk lore, in the Holy Text, with a grain of salt or perception of the intent of such myths. We place too much credence on some text written in a different era for a very different society or culture and try to apply it to modern culture that has come a long way in the way we live including our better understanding of science and logic.

debunker wrote:by the way, Ronyvo... you're Coptic, right? I heard that your Bible is SUBSTANTIALLY different from the Western Bible, is that true? Like it's not only different translation but it contains different passages/books... is it true?

I wonder what "poster" you refer to? This was the third post on the thread.

I never read a single negative thing about the life of Mohammed in the main stream media, the media instead of worrying about if Jesus was married or not and wasting our time on those issues, they could instead expose Islam and Mohammed and explain to its readers why their is so much violence and terrorism by Muslims around the world, by being honest and explaining what the Quran actually says and what Mohammed did, killing, robbery, torture, rape, pedophilia, slavery...ordering hate violence and oppression against none Muslims...all the things Jesus was against

Instead the media attack's a peaceful religion like Christianity and calls the violent religion of Islama peaceful religion, and not a word about Mohammed's evil violent life....

good is bad, and bad is good with the liberal press.bunch of dishonest people....their credibility is fast going down the drain.

Dear S,

You know what I really hope for? Producing a program or a movie or a new series with the title: "Untold Stories from the Bible". Enough movies about Moses splitting the Sea... We want movies about Moses stoning men for waorking on a Satuday, Moses committing EVERY war crime there is on the Midianites, stories on how the city of Jericho was "devoted" to Yahweh, a story on how the tribe of Benjamin was almost wiped out with blessings from Yahweh.... etc, etc.... The Bible is a real treasure full of too many horrific scenes... I wonder why wouldn't the media or hollywood dare to tap into this age old book inspired by non other than Yahweh Himself?

Here is your SECOND post on the thread. You posted this right after it was mentioned that its too bad that Christianity gets slammed while Islam is portrayed in the media as the "Religion of Peace".

So when exactly did you start the tu quoque? Well you started in the THIRD post in the thread, your FIRST post with your slippery inferrence of the corruption of Christianity with your "Oh, isn't the Coptic Bible totally different" stuff.

debunker wrote:please note Brenda that the whole "tu quoque" thing started when one of the posters here, whined about why the Quran isn't mocked unlike the Bible. My response was, instead of mocking either why not make movies based on stories from these two books... I was trying to make the point that the Bible is FAR from being exposed.... too many stories are unknown to the vast majority of Christians... then we got into the "comparison" game... and by the way, I don't believe the lies in the Bible slandering Moses, other prophets and God.

As I have pointed out, your first post...

Anyway, whether Moses existed or not, Yahweh exists or not, why not produce a movies about stories from both te Bible and the Quran? I don't see why do you object to the production of such movies?

Nah. The Quran is written by Allah, remember? Let's compare movies of the MAN-written Bible against the MAN-written HADITHS.

BTW, according to a German professor, Mohammed also never existed...

And the opinions of this man matter why? Do you believe him? Do you discount the letters Mohammad wrote to the Syrians, the Persians, the Byzantines?

Finally, it really irritates me when atheists think they have all the answers... what makes you think that archeology has given you the whole answer and the true size of the Kingdom of David?

Please cite where I said anything about a "whole answer". Archaeology merely provides evidence - which is utterly lacking in the Bible tales.

Here is your SECOND post on the thread. You posted this right after it was mentioned that its too bad that Christianity gets slammed while Islam is portrayed in the media as the "Religion of Peace".

So when exactly did you start the tu quoque? Well you started in the THIRD post in the thread, your FIRST post with your slippery inferrence of the corruption of Christianity with your "Oh, isn't the Coptic Bible totally different" stuff.

?? I asked (an admittedly) irrelevant question about the Coptic Bible because Wiki doesn't provide much info about it.

Nah. The Quran is written by Allah, remember? Let's compare movies of the MAN-written Bible against the MAN-written HADITHS.

The problem is: Every Islamic sect has their own Hadith... and the collection of Hadith within each sect is gigantic (even much bigger than the Bible)...

Actually, I would not object a bit if movies were made about the ALLEGED behaviour of the ancient Hebrews and the ACTUAL historical behaviour of the invading Islamic armies

Why do you keep saying "alleged"? I personally believe that it's mainly lies (Moses didn't stone people for breaking the Sabath, etc), But religious Christians DO believe that the Bible is the word of God and that's what matters.

And the opinions of this man matter why? Do you believe him? Do you discount the letters Mohammad wrote to the Syrians, the Persians, the Byzantines?

I was just using your logic... you believe the Biblical Moses is fictional (so do I) but religious Christians believe that he was real and that's what matters. Similarly, this guy believes Muhammed was fictional but Muslims don't and that's what matters.

Belief or non-belief is not the issue. The issue is proven and unproven.

We know the history of Islam in its wars of conquest. You want to compare the unknown and unproven which happened or did not happen some 3,500 years ago regarding the Hebrews, with what is factually known about Islamic history and what is still going on today.

You want to compare some standard of religious behaviour ONCE practised long ago by the Jews but no longer adhered to, with CURRENT religious behaviour practised by Muslims and even backed up by modern day MAINSTREAM Islamic fiqh.

I grew up in a stong Christian background, being obliged to attend church and study the Bible. I have known many Christians of many denominations throughout my life. I do not know a single one who thinks that God wrote the Bible. Even the more fundamental Churches I have known have taught that the Bible is INSPIRED; but I have never heard it said that this "inspiration" was always manifested in the same way with every writer of the Bible. Even the disciples of Jesus had differences of opinion regarding Christianity - and this is openly displayed in the New Testament. They QUARRELLED with one another, for pity sake.

Because Islamic thinking is so rigid regarding their own holy book, they cannot seem to quite comprehend what many Christians really mean when they call the Bible "inspired". The Bible is NOT seen by Christians to be a rigid and static God rule-book.The best way I can explain this is to tell you that Christians will often claim that they will read a verse hundreds of times and it might mean one thing to them. Then one day the verse takes on an entirely different meaning - so they will say that God made the verse personal to them and revealed it in a different way.

Many Christians would say that this is why Jesus spoke in parables - so that he was not spoon-feeding absolutes, but forcing people to go away and think, looking at the parables from all different angles.

The Bible is admitted to be a series of MAN-written books, albeit "inspired"; or comprised of stories which are supposed to be either about events or which are supposed to hold some moral lesson. The reason that Christians still keep the Old Testament as part of their Bible is because they perceive prophesies in them and because it gives a background to the Jewish religion - which was the religion of Jesus. Like the Hadiths, human written accounts of something - but unlike the Hadiths, much further back in history and not backed by any classification of "sahih" or chains of narration.

But here I speak of their BELIEFS.

ACTIONS speak much louder than words. So, if you want to allege that something from the Bible ACTUALLY happened, then please present credible evidence.

And, incidentally, it has not escaped my notice that you treat the hadiths in a very selective way. On the one hand you pooh-pooh the sahih hadiths regarding Aisha's age, and then on the other hand you maintain there is some evidence in the panicked (and debunked) damage-limitation speculations of her being much older based on....oh, you guessed: HADITHS.

Anyway, if you refuse to engage about all the nasty things devoted Muslims had to say about the prophet in your hadiths(and totally accepted and believed in by most mainstream Muslims, regardless of how you personally view them), then surely you should not be engaged in accusations based on old Bible stories which have no evidence backing them, not even chains of narration, and which are so far back in history that they are all but irrelevent in today's world - Unlike Islam and the transformation of Islamic religious belief into Muslim actions which we see all over the globe today and which are seen over and over throughout Islam's over 1400 year history.

We know the history of Islam in its wars of conquest. You want to compare the unknown and unproven which happened or did not happen some 3,500 years ago regarding the Hebrews, with what is factually known about Islamic history and what is still going on today.

You want to compare some standard of religious behaviour ONCE practised long ago by the Jews but no longer adhered to, with CURRENT religious behaviour practised by Muslims and even backed up by modern day MAINSTREAM Islamic fiqh.

What now? Are you going to say that Islamic conquests since Muhammed's death are part of the Quran (or even Haith)? If you're saying that the Quran is responsible for every action of every Islamic government throughout history, then I'll have to use your logic to claim that all the atrocities caused by Christians were inspired by the morality of Yahweh. (well, actually Yahweh's monstrosity exceeds any crime ever committed by Christians or any ruthless tyrant ever lived).

I grew up in a stong Christian background, being obliged to attend church and study the Bible. I have known many Christians of many denominations throughout my life. I do not know a single one who thinks that God wrote the Bible. Even the more fundamental Churches I have known have taught that the Bible is INSPIRED;

So? The words of the Bible are not Yahweh's but the MESSAGE is Yahweh's... no religious Christian says otherwise.

Because Islamic thinking is so rigid regarding their own holy book, they cannot seem to quite comprehend what many Christians really mean when they call the Bible "inspired". The Bible is NOT seen by Christians to be a rigid and static God rule-book.The best way I can explain this is to tell you that Christians will often claim that they will read a verse hundreds of times and it might mean one thing to them. Then one day the verse takes on an entirely different meaning - so they will say that God made the verse personal to them and revealed it in a different way.

Some Muslims think the same way too.

The Bible is admitted to be a series of MAN-written books, albeit "inspired"; or comprised of stories which are supposed to be either about events or which are supposed to hold some moral lesson. The reason that Christians still keep the Old Testament as part of their Bible is because they perceive prophesies in them and because it gives a background to the Jewish religion - which was the religion of Jesus. Like the Hadiths, human written accounts of something - but unlike the Hadiths, much further back in history and not backed by any classification of "sahih" or chains of narration.

No dear, they keep the The Hebrew Bible because Jesus essentially told them not to ignore the OT, care for some verses?

And, incidentally, it has not escaped my notice that you treat the hadiths in a very selective way. On the one hand you pooh-pooh the sahih hadiths regarding Aisha's age, and then on the other hand you maintain there is some evidence in the panicked (and debunked) damage-limitation speculations of her being much older based on....oh, you guessed: HADITHS.

No, I'm saying Hadiths are contradictory with themselves. What makes you choose one Hadith over the other? Did you know that Shiites believe (according to their Hadith) that she was 15? Everyone's got their Hadith and every Hadith book contains contradictory Hadiths and Hadiths that contradict the Quran.

Anyway, if you refuse to engage about all the nasty things devoted Muslims had to say about the prophet in your hadiths(and totally accepted and believed in by most mainstream Muslims, regardless of how you personally view them), then surely you should not be engaged in accusations based on old Bible stories which have no evidence backing them, not even chains of narration, and which are so far back in history that they are all but irrelevent in today's world - Unlike Islam and the transformation of Islamic religious belief into Muslim actions which we see all over the globe today and which are seen over and over throughout Islam's over 1400 year history.

Define "mainstream". Shiites/Sunnis/Sufis? The Bible is like the Quran in the sense that All Muslim sects accept the Quan as the truth, simliarly All Christians accept the Bible as the truth... now when it comes to Hadith, every sect have their own books... For example, a Shiite would proudly produce a Hadith saying that Ali is the gatekeeper of heaven and no one enters except by his permission (including prophets)... Sunnis piss on such Hadith... etc, etc... the only common ground for them is the Quran (different interpretation but same book).

Yahweh is ageless... after watching these movies they will spit on Yahweh for the herrondous crimes He ordered. The fact that the Jews ignore the Bible, doesn't make up for Yahweh's Satanic nature.

As i said its just that old stories, what the OT bible says means nothing to people living todayunlike Muslims who follow Mohammed's words and actions as Allah's last messenger and cannot be changed...sowhat Muslims believe matters its the reason why their is so much violence in Muslim countries and oppression against all none Muslims, because of Mohammed and his violent book called the Quran, fight them until Islam rules and the only religion is Islam....

you don't see Jews or Christians killing people to force religion on people, only Muslims do, orded for all times to fight...

Anyway, if that's what you believe then why don't Christians allow Hollywood to produce movies about untold stories from the Bible? Would you support the production of such movies? Yes/No?

Since when does hollywood care what Christian's think ? there's no such think as untold bible stories, if its untold then why its in the OT ?........the better question is why don't you Muslims make a real movie about Islam and Mohammed also using the hadiths as recorded by Muslims historians, and not hide the real truth about Mohammed.....the good the bad and the ugly....nothing but the truth...

Christians follow JESUS not the laws in the OT for all times...

Jesus brought down a new teaching of peace, and Mohammed came after Jesus and went back to hate and violence for all times, until Muslims force every human into Islam or slavery....so says your Quran...

I challenge you to bring me one verse that says ALL of the Quran is for ALL time.

hate for all times and war against none Muslims for all times, Mohammed and the Quran order...

9:29 "Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya [religious tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords.’" (vol. 4, p. 55)

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me…" (vol. 4, p. 124)

"It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he has made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land…" (vol. 4, p. 161)

As i said its just that old stories, what the OT bible says means nothing to people living todayunlike Muslims who follow Mohammed's words and actions as Allah's last messenger and cannot be changed...sowhat Muslims believe matters its the reason why their is so much violence in Muslim countries and oppression against all none Muslims, because of Mohammed and his violent book called the Quran, fight them until Islam rules and the only religion is Islam....

you don't see Jews or Christians killing people to force religion on people, only Muslims do, orded for all times to fight...

Oh please S! You know what? even if all Christians turned atheists I still don't see why not make movies inspired by Yahweh's morality.

Since when does hollywood care what Christian's think ? there's no such think as untold bible stories, if its untold then why its in the OT ?........the better question is why don't you Muslims make a real movie about Islam and Mohammed also using the hadiths as recorded by Muslims historians, and not hide the real truth about Mohammed.....the good the bad and the ugly....nothing but the truth...

I repeat even they all turned to atheists, I still want movies. (besides, Jesus DID say not to ignore the OT... or something to that effect )

Jesus brought down a new teaching of peace, and Mohammed came after Jesus and went back to hate and violence for all times, until Muslims force every human into Islam or slavery....so says your Quran...

More lies.

hate for all times and war against none Muslims for all times, Mohammed and the Quran order...

Why the evasive Christian style?... I asked you for a verse that says all of the Quran is for all time.. give me one.

"It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he has made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land…" (vol. 4, p. 161)

This verse was revealed about a battle for self defence, next.

9:29 "Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya [religious tax] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

This has nothing to do with conquest... anyway, it's not even like the Spanish inquistion. A heritic in Islam has to publically anounce his heresy up to 3 times before being killed.

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords.’" (vol. 4, p. 55)

"Allah's Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me…" (vol. 4, p. 124)

The first Hadith sounds dubious at best, the second one contradicts the Quran... straight to the trash bin. If you want to see a true example of Islamic conquest, check out the covenant of Umar (not that I like the idea of conquest, besides, it is obsolete).

Certainly the terrorist actions of Muslims are linked to the Quran. I do not need to make this claim - they make it for themselves. Or, living in the West, do you just ignore the crap that spews from the Muslim countries and only consume the sanitised white lie versions of Islam offerred to placate kaffirs and naive westernised Muslims?

And we have an entire history of Jurists and most esteemed Scholars of Islam throughout Islamic history quoting the chapter and verses from the Quran to justify violent jihad, dhimmitude, treatment of right hand possessions, wife beating, marrying little pre-pubescent girls, slavery, ad nauseum.

Shia Islam is the next largest. Please tell me what mainstream Shia fiqh says is the appropriate punishment for apostasy.

Do you really believe that the massive support Bin Laden and his ilk receives in places like Pakistan, etc. is something that arises from a vacuum and has nothing to do with Islam? Please leave out any nonsense about American invasions in your answer - Islamic terrorism was in full swing long before any US troops set foot in Iraq or Afghanistan. It has been in full swing since the days of Mohammad, apart from a few lulls where it turned its slaughtering instincts upon itself, Muslim v. Muslim.

Do you really believe that Thomas Jefferson was imagining things when it was explained to him that the reason American ships were being attacked and having their sailors taken in slavery was because, as non-Muslims, they were not protected from Islamic attack unless they converted or paid the jizya and recognised Islamic supremacy?

Do you not comprehend that Islam has been spread by the sword from the beginning just like Mohammad began it?

Islam has had over 1400 years to prove itself a "peaceful" religion, but the only peace it has ever offered has been the sort of "peace" one finds in a grave. When it is not kaffirs being slaughtered and enslaved, it is other Muslims.

You cannot just ignore the ulema, the slaughtering cries of "God is great", the verses cited over and over, the justifying backing of Islam's scholars and jurists, and try to claim: Oh no, nothing to do with the Quran. Nothing to do with Islam.

You are contradicted every single day by the pronouncements of the killers and their clerics and scholars. And by the Quran itself.